Re: "Mailto" Command

Paul Prescod (papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca)
Tue, 08 Apr 1997 14:19:33 -0400


Message-ID: <334A8C35.776D@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 1997 14:19:33 -0400
From: Paul Prescod <papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
To: Carl Morris <msftrncs@htcnet.com>, www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: "Mailto" Command

Carl Morris wrote:
> Not an answer, if a company sends you a form, who do you send it back to.
> Usually them!!!!  Specifically, if you get a form in the mail, you usually
> mail it back.  
...
> Logic...


And what if you pick up a form at the supermarket: "Apply for Visa!"
Don't you mail it in? Or do you go back and try to give it to the woman
at the cash register. Your And what if you get a form in the mail that
says: "fill this out and present it at any Burger King for a free
whopper." Do you mail it back and hope that they will mail you your
whopper? Your "logic" is full of holes. 

> There is no difference here.  If a WWW server sends the
> form, it should go back to the WWW server or at least via HTTP to another
> server.  If you get a form in the e-mail, then the answer should be
> returned via e-mail.  Its called "it just plain makes sense".

Its called reducing people's options for no good reason.
 
> No,  it is the problem that has caused people to think that a form in a WWW
> page can be answered via e-mail.  I do not answer WWW forms via e-mail!!!!

Good for you. You choose not to take advantage of that option. So why
are you complaining that it exists?

> You may think its nice to have options.  When those options result in more
> hassles to the end users, then they're "optional" status has worn thin.  I
> find e-mail returned forms to be a hassle, and I know from experience that
> others have too.

If we stripped out every feature of the Web that caused hassles we
wouldn't have anything left.

 Paul Prescod